Saturday, July 27, 2013

Successful vs. Effective Leadership

Success has to do with how the individual or group behaves. Effectiveness describes the predisposition of an individual or group. 

Individuals who are interested only on success tend to emphasize position power and use close supervision. Individuals who focus on effectiveness depend on personal power and use more general supervision.

The difference between successful and effective often explains why many teachers can get satisfactory level of behavior and performance of their students only when they are right there supervising. Many teachers are very successful, it is more rare to have the effective teacher - one whose students, because of the training and practice that has taken place, perform just as well when the teacher is not there.

For effect leadership to take place, the common goals of the entire class or organization must be established and accepted.

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Immaturity-Maturity Continuum

According to Chris Argyris, seven changes should take place in the personality of individuals if they are to develop into mature people. First, individuals move from a passive state as infants to a state on increasing activity as adults. Second, individuals develop from a state of dependency upon others as infants to a state of relative independence as adults. Third, individuals behave in only a few ways as infants, but as adults they are capable of behaving in many ways. Fourth, individuals have erratic, casual, and shallow interests as infants, but deeper and stronger interests as adults. Fifth, the time perspective of children is very short, involving only the present, but as they mature, their time perspective increases to include the past and the future. Sixth, individuals as infants are subordinate to everyone, but they move to equal or superior positions with others as adults. Seventh, as children, individuals lack an awareness of a "self." Agryis suggests that these changes reside on a continuum and that the "healthy" personality develops along the continuum from "immaturity" to "maturity."

Immaturity-Maturity Continuum

Immaturity - Maturity
Passive - Active
Dependent - Independent
Behave in a few ways - Capable of behaving in many ways
Erratic shallow interests - Deeper and stronger interests
Short time perspective - Long time perspective (past and future)
Subordinate position - Equal or superordinate position
Lack of awareness of self - Awareness and control over self

People are not a specific place on the continuum based upon a specific chronological age. Each individual is different. As teachers, we must recognize that difference. Additionally, we need to help each child develop along the continuum. In order to do this, different children require different strategies. 

Keeping people immature seems to be built into the very nature of formal organizations such as schools. This concept of formal organizations lead to assumptions about human nature that are incompatible with the proper development of maturity in human personality.

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

Theory X and Theory Y

Theory X-Theory Y by Douglas McGregor describes how the traditional organization (e.g. schools) - with its centralized decision making, hierarchical pyramid, and external control of work - is based on certain assumptions about human nature and human motivation. These assumptions, called Theory X by McGregor, state that most people prefer to be directed, are not interested in assuming responsibility, and want safety above all. Accompanying this philosophy is the belief that people are motivated by money, fringe benefits, and the threat of punishment.

Teachers who accept Theory X assumptions attempt to structure, control, and closely supervise their students. These teachers feel that external control is clearly appropriate for dealing with unreliable and irresponsible children.

After describing Theory X, McGregor questioned whether this view of human nature is correct. Drawing heavily on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, McGregor concluded that Theory X assumptions about human nature, when universally applied, are often inaccurate and that motivational approaches based on it often fail to motivate many individuals.

McGregor felt that management needed practices based on a more accurate understanding of human nature and motivation. As a result, he developed an alternative theory of human behavior called Theory Y. This theory assumes that people are not, by nature, lazy and unreliable. It suggests that people can be basically self-directed and creative at work if properly motivated. Theory Y goes on to state that properly motivated people can achieve their own goals best by properly directing their own efforts toward accomplishing organizational goals.

This chart identifies key assumptions of Theory X - Theory Y:

Theory X
  1. Work is inherently distasteful to most people.
  2. Most people are not ambitious, have little desire for responsibility, and prefer to be directed.
  3. Most people have little capacity for creativity in solving organizational problems.
  4. Motivation occurs only at the physiological and security levels.
  5. Most people must be closely controlled and often coerced to achieve organizational objectives.

Theory Y
  1. Work is as natural as play, if the conditions are favorable.
  2. Self-control is often indispensable in achieving organizational goals
  3. The capacity for creativity in solving organizational problems is widely distributed in the population.
  4. Motivation occurs at the social, esteem, and self-actualization levels, as well as at the physiological and security levels.
  5. People can be self-directed and creative at work if properly motivated.

When showing this list to teachers in our training sessions, teachers almost universally state they support - and practice Theory Y. We have trained teachers to be repelled by Theory X, at least publicly. In the privacy of their own classrooms (or for that matter, many coaches on the athletic fields), many teachers engage in practices which would indicate a strong belief in the assumptions of Theory X.

There is no one right way to be all the time. We have all had students who fit Theory X, and other who fit Theory Y. Theory X and Theory Y are attitudes, or predispositions, toward people. Thus, although the "best" assumptions for a teacher to have may be Theory Y, it may not be appropriate to behave consistently with those assumptions all the time. Teachers and coaches may have Theory Y assumptions about human nature, but they may find it necessary to behave in a very directive, controlling manner (as if they had Theory X assumptions) with some people in the short run to help them "grow up" in a developmental sense, until they are truly Theory Y-acting people.

The key is to be purposeful, reflective, metacognitive . . . don't say you are being highly directive because the child "needs it," when in reality it is the teacher who finds it more comfortable to be that way. Always keep the goal in mind . . . do you want to control or help the child grow - and what is the best way to accomplish that goal.